RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2

Moderators: Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,454
And1: 8,115
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#1 » by trex_8063 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:18 pm

1. Michael Jordan
2. ???

Just a reminder: I only need a 1st choice and a 2nd choice (helps if you bold them so it's easy to see). If you change your vote, do so in your original vote thread (and just give me a heads up that you've changed it).

We're hopefully looking at threads only being open 48 hours from here on, so please try to be prompt. So without further ado....

Image


eminence wrote:.

penbeast0 wrote:.

Quotatious wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

PaulieWal wrote:.

Colbini wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dr Spaceman wrote:.

fpliii wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

SactoKingsFan wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

JordansBulls wrote:.

RSCS3_ wrote:.

BasketballFan7 wrote:.

micahclay wrote:.

PockyCandy wrote:.

ardee wrote:.

RCM88x wrote:.

Tesla wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

LA Bird wrote:.

MyUniBroDavis wrote:.

kayess wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

MisterHibachi wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

mischievous wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Bad Gatorade wrote:.

andrewww wrote:.

colts18 wrote:.

Moonbeam wrote:.

Cyrusman122000 wrote:.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:.

Narigo wrote:.

wojoaderge wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.

Outside wrote:.

scabbarista wrote:.

janmagn wrote:.

Freighttrain wrote:.

Doormatt wrote:.

ZeppelinPage wrote:.

Wavy Q wrote:.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
drza
Analyst
Posts: 3,518
And1: 1,859
Joined: May 22, 2001

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#2 » by drza » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:25 pm

Re-posted from end of last thread, since all involved are still on the board & we're starting fresh.

Kareem vs Duncan, Peak impact and functional longevity

There's been some discussion thus far about Kareem vs Duncan in this thread, but to me it's been very shallow. Boxscore only, not much attempt to look at impact. ThaRegul8tr's Duncan leadership post and Blackmill's Kareem video mantage upped the game, though, to me. We can do better than just a broad boxscore-based comparison. So, let me give some thoughts.

The RPoY Project: Impact
The Retro Player of the Year project in 2010 made a huge impact on me. I'd never gone that in depth, for that period of time, about so much of NBA history. Going into that project, if asked, I'd have probably said that Russell was overrated due to ringzz, that Wilt was underrated because he just didn't have enough help, and that not only was Kareem way better than Walton, but that Kareem may very well have been my GOAT.

One of the parts of that project that really stood out to me was the 1978 and 1977 seasons, and the discussions around Kareem and Walton. Again, going in, my default was that Kareem was clearly better. At the time, I tended to find it annoying that Walton was even mentioned with Kareem. But then, there was the discussion. And this guy named ElGee made a post that didn't change my vote at the time (I voted Kareem over Walton both years), but that stuck with me. Both Kareem (1978) and Walton (1977 and 78) had missed significant time in those years, and ElGee put together this post pointing out that when both were injured at that time, the Walton-less Blazers played at a similar level as the Kareem'-lessLakers. But, when both were healthy, the Blazers with Walton played WAY better than the Lakers with Kareem. He made a comp of the points scored and allowed, in both situations, and the difference was huge in Walton's favor.

When I voted in that project, I defaulted to the idea that Kareem was better than Walton in every way in the boxscores, and that he could do just about everything that Walton did at a high level (strong defender, great passer for a big) but on top of that he was a dominant scorer, so Kareem had to be the better player, right?

Only...why did Walton seem to measure out with the much higher impact, both right at their peaks?

RPoY Project II: scouting notes vs Blackmill's excellent video

Blackmill just delivered a mic drop of a post about Kareem's skillset, on both offense and defense, using video evidence as support. It was great stuff, illuminating stuff, showing how Kareem could his frankly unprecedented length/quickness combo on defense to show on perimeter players, play passing lanes, and recover to block shots at the rim. He truly was a marvelous player.

But. (You knew there was a but coming).

Blackmill pointed out that much of his footage of Kareem as an active defender in space came from an All Star game, and I note the language that he used:

3. With capable teammates, Kareem was able to be much more active on help defense.

The last point is particularly important. It can be observed in the 1977 playoffs that the Lakers routinely failed to help the helper when Kareem rotated. Samurai, a poster who you may know for his insights and having watched much of Kareem's career, made this observation several years ago:

[...]Washington gave LA the big power forward to battle someone like Lucas and give Kareem an enforcer in much the same way that Lucas helped Walton. KAJ could be more active in help defense, switch off, and chase bigs who could shoot outside because he knew that Kermit was there to grab the rebound.[...]


Blackmill's contention (and correct me if I misrepresent it), is that Kareem had the skillset to be that defender in space all of the time at his peak. BUT, that since he didn't have the support he needed (either in team talent, or in another big like Kermit) that Kareem didn't often take advantage of those in-space defensive skills in the actual NBA games.

That's huge, and goes hand-in-hand with Doc MJ's scouting notes from game film of the 1977 Finals, where he pointed out that thought yes, Kareem was dominating as a scorer and was doing amazing things overall, that Walton was the one defending all over the court (massive horizontal, team-help defense) while Kareem's defense was relegated primarily to action in the paint/near the rim. (Similarly, I'd argue, Walton was a full-time offensive hub with his passing ability. Kareem had excellent passing ability, but never used it to that same extent).

This becomes, to me, a HUGE point in the debate about just how much impact Kareem was having at his peak. I believe it was Doc MJ, in one of the projects through the years, that asked: if Kareem was as good as or better than Walton at every skill, how could he possibly not be the better player? But the answer, to me, comes down to how those skills are deployed.

Kareem, in his prime/peak years, was an all-history scorer (both volume and especially efficiency) around that unstoppable hook, who (in practice) was a great rim protector/rebounder and an excellent passer for a center. Walton, at his peak, was an all-history defensive big who was a primary offensive hub/creator for his team as a passer and a merely adequate scorer. Kareem may have had the skills to play the way that Walton did on defense and as a passer full-time (as indicated, perhaps, by Blackmill's videos)...BUT THAT'S NOT THE WAY THAT HE ACTUALLY PLAYED! Not full time. And that's worth noting, and circling in our minds.

Back to WOWY, at peak

I mentioned the genesis of ElGee's WOWY work from the RPoY project, but of course he went on to develop it in much more detail across NBA history. As such, I can reference that work and find single-year WOWY runs, across multiple seasons during their peak years, for each of Kareem, Walton and Duncan. Let's take a look:

Kareem 1975 (16 games missed): SRS in 2.6, SRS out -4.5
Kareem 1978 (20 games missed): SRS in -3.4, SRS out -1.7

Duncan 2004 (10 games missed): SRS in, 8.5; SRS out, 5.3
Duncan 2005 (12 games missed): SRS in, 9.3; SRS out, -1

Walton 1977 (16 games missed): SRS in, 7.8; SRS out, -2.6
Walton 1978 (10 games missed): SRS in, 9.4; SRS out, +1

ElGee went through and calculated his WOWY score for each run, but I honestly don't have the greatest handle on that process so I'll abstain from quoting the scores themselves (though Walton's and Duncan's were both higher, here).

But, just looking at the raw data for these runs, two seasons each, right around each of their peaks...both Walton and Duncan seemed to be having significantly larger impacts on their team's fortunes at their peaks than Kareem did. At least, by this one measure. But, in many ways it's the best impact data available from the pre databall era, especially since each missed significant time during peak years so that the measure could be made.

Put it together...what does this suggest about Kareem's peak + trends from databall

So, what am I left with, here:

1) Kareem, in his prime, had elite skillsets across the board (thanks, Blackmill vids)

2) Kareem, in his prime, put up scoring (volume and efficiency) numbers at an all-Mt. Rushmore level.

3) Kareem, in his prime, put up excellent rebounding, blocked shot and assist numbers as well

4) However, while Kareem had the ABILITY to be an elite horizontal defender and possibly offensive hub as a passer from the center position, in PRACTICE he tended to be more of a vertical defender around the rim and to pass as more of a secondary role, not as a big man team offense initiator

5) Kareem's (all-everything scorer, strong defender, strong big man passer) peak impact as estimated by 2 seasons in which he missed extended time was SIGNIFICANTLY lower than the peak impact estimates of Tim Duncan (all-everything defender, strong scorer, strong big man passer) or Bill Walton (all-everything defender, all-everything big man offense hub with passing, adequate scorer)

6) From the databall era, identified trends indicate that big man defense and big man team-offense-running as passing hub both correlate strongly with huge impact. Both defense and passing, in fact, correlate more with big man positive impact than high efficiency scoring.

When I put that all together, it starts to get pretty convincing to me that in their primes, while Kareem was clearly the better scorer with excellent all around boxscore stats, that Duncan was frankly just the more impactful player. In their primes.

Late career Kareem vs Duncan (and Garnett): functional longevity

Kareem (years 13 - 18):
30.6 pts/100 (61% TS), 10.4 reb, 1.1 stl, 2.7 blk, 4.1 ast, 3.7 TO (33 mpg)

Duncan (years 13 - 18): 27.3 pts/100 (55% TS), 16.6 reb, 1.2 stl, 3.3 blk, 4.9 ast, 3.2 TO (29 mpg)

Garnett (years 13 - 18):
26.8 pts/100 (56% TS), 14.2 reb, 2.0 stl, 1.7 blk, 4.6 ast, 2.8 TO (31 mpg)

I put these boxscore per 100 numbers up to have something quantitative, but obviously it doesn't tell the whole story. It does give some support to my following statements, though:

1) Kareem was still clearly the best scorer of this group. Slightly more volume on much better efficiency

2) Duncan and Garnett were far better defenders. The rebounding helps show this. But, I don't really think it's a controversial statement. Duncan and Garnett were inner-circle, best in the NBA level defenders during this period. Kareem wasn't

3) If my premise from their primes holds merit...that despite Kareem's dominant scoring with strong defense and strong passing, Duncan's dominant defense with strong scoring and strong passing was of more impact (likely due to dominant defense tending to be higher impact than dominant scoring for bigs), then in their later years when these tendencies were even stronger...wouldn't that suggest that Duncan's impact difference was even larger than it was in their primes?

And this is year's 13 - 18...by years 19 and 20, Kareem had clearly dipped further. Duncan also dipped for year 19, his last. And Garnett did as well, when he went to Brooklyn. So, I'd argue that year 18 is a reasonable end point for each of their functional longevity. And really...to that point, I'd argue that BOTH Duncan and Garnett were at least as effective as Kareem out to that mark. And really, more so with their defensive dominance.
Creator of the Hoops Lab: tinyurl.com/mpo2brj
Contributor to NylonCalculusDOTcom
Contributor to TYTSports: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTbFEVCpx9shKEsZl7FcRHzpGO1dPoimk
Follow on Twitter: @ProfessorDrz
User avatar
Goudelock
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 9,304
And1: 20,915
Joined: Jan 27, 2015
Location: College of Charleston
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#3 » by Goudelock » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:26 pm

So I pick Jabbar for #2, and LeBron for #3. I'll explain my reasoning later when I have time.
Devin Booker wrote:Bro.
JordansBulls
RealGM
Posts: 60,466
And1: 5,344
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: HCA (Homecourt Advantage)

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#4 » by JordansBulls » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:41 pm

This comes down to two players imo. Bill Russell and Kareem.
Kareem had the greater prime and peak but he lost some series he shouldn't had with HCA. Also he was not that great in series without HCA either. He was 3-7 and 2 of those wins came when he wasn't even the best player on the squad. Also I understand people saying Longevity is good but to me that matters when the player is the best player on the squad. Kareem playing 20 seasons but at least 7 of those seasons not even the best player on his team doesn't add to him being greater especially when in 1987 and 1988 he was probably the 3rd best player on the squad in 1987 and either 3rd or 4th if that especially in 1988.
However his 1971 season to me was more impressive than Russell's best season.

Here are some quotes and post regarding them both.

By " "


I think most people would say either Jordan or one of the big three. Jordan has a couple of advantages there -- he played most recently and played a different position, so the three centers split some votes.
Personally I think the only two players that you can make a case for as greatest ever are Russell and Jordan. To me its those two and then Jabbar,Wilt,Magic,and Bird in any order. I think these 6 players are by themselves ahead of anyone else. My problem with naming Jabbar the greatest is he failed to win some titles that i thought he should have won if he was the greatest ever. I didn't see Jabbar win any titles that I thought Russell or Jordan couldn't have won if surrounded equal talent as Jabbar was.

Thats the same reason that I wouldn't rank Wilt,Magic,or Bird as high as Russell or Jordan. I saw Wilt,Magic,Bird,and Jabbar fail at times where I thought if they were realy the greatest they should have won the titles or at least done better. Russell and Jordan in my opinion won the title everytime they were surrounded by enough talent that someone considered the greatest ever should win a title. Jabbar was surrouned by a very good Bucks team in 73 and failed to even make it past the Warriors. In 81 surrounded by a great Laker team he lost to the Rockets. In 83 surrounded by a great Laker team he was swept by the 76ers. I couldn't see this happening to Russell or Jordan.



By That Nicka
Bill Russell had similar success, with 5 MVPs, 11 championships (and he would have had countless Finals MVPs)... We could assume that he would have had 12 or 13 All Defensive first teams had the award been around back then also

He led the league in defensive win shares 11 times and is the all time leader in defensive win shares.

5 x rebound leader
4 x was top 7 in assists
4 x was top 5 in FG%
(may have led league in blocks several times)

BUT Russell was a bigger liability on offense than Jordan was on defense. Jordan was consistently in the top 6 in defensive win shares and the top 2 in offensive win shares (usually #1) while Russell was consistently in the top 3 in defensive win shares (usually #1) while he did never placed in the top 10 in offensive win shares during his entire career.

Also, you have to note that his championships came, at times, with as many as 7 hall of famers on his roster. There were only 8 teams, and he usually only had to play 2 rounds in the playoffs. His teammate Bob Cousy won an MVP while playing with Russell.

Also he only made 3 All-NBA first teams, usually placing behind Wilt. So he generally was not even the best individual Center in his league...



By That Nicka
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

6 MVPs
2 Finals MVPs (has a case for a 3rd)
10 x All-NBA first team (5 x All-NBA 2nd)
5 x All-Defense first (6 x All-Defense 2nd)
6 x Champ
2 x scoring leader
9 x PER leader (compared to Jordan's 7)
4 x block leader (could be more, wasnt recorded until his 5th season)
1 x rebound leader
1 x FG% leader
9 x win shares leader (equal to Jordan)

consistently in top 7 in offensive win shares and top 9 in defensive win shares

He too, had a slight dropoff in playoff production, but not enough to really criticize him about. His longevity is better than Jordan's and his defense is more valuable. But Jordan won as many championships and he did despite playing 5 less seasons and on less talented teams (imo). Magic was the best player on at least 2 of the Laker championships. And the the little things like Jordan never lost with HCA and was undefeated in the Finals etc... Not really important unless youre nitpicking, but when deciding between players this close you kinda have to nitpick.

I will say this also, despite Kareem playing the more valuable defensive position, Jordan generally fared BETTER in terms of defensive win shares (on an average basis) so thats something to think about and offensively its not really a contest imo as Jordan is the greatest offensive player (at least of the ones that are in this discussion).


This is how they compared with HCA.

Code: Select all

 
              HCA(50+)/non-50     
Russell:      10-0 / 12-1 (injured most of series)         
Jabbar:       11-3 / 23-2       



Code: Select all

 
              Road(50+)/non-50   
Russell:      5-1 / 0-0 
Jabbar:       2-6 / 1-1





Now while Kareem lost some series he should have lost, there were a few he should not have lost. 1973 vs GSW with HCA it was against the lowest seeded team in the playoffs. 1981 to a team below .500 (this was still prime Kareem then as well).

1st Vote: Bill Russell
2nd Vote: Kareem

Lebron and Duncan and Magic will be in the mix after these two for me.
Image
"Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships."
- Michael Jordan
colts18
Head Coach
Posts: 7,433
And1: 3,248
Joined: Jun 29, 2009

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#5 » by colts18 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:44 pm

drza wrote:When I put that all together, it starts to get pretty convincing to me that in their primes, while Kareem was clearly the better scorer with excellent all around boxscore stats, that Duncan was frankly just the more impactful player. In their primes.

Late career Kareem vs Duncan (and Garnett): functional longevity

Kareem (years 13 - 18):
30.6 pts/100 (61% TS), 10.4 reb, 1.1 stl, 2.7 blk, 4.1 ast, 3.7 TO (33 mpg)

Duncan (years 13 - 18): 27.3 pts/100 (55% TS), 16.6 reb, 1.2 stl, 3.3 blk, 4.9 ast, 3.2 TO (29 mpg)

Garnett (years 13 - 18):
26.8 pts/100 (56% TS), 14.2 reb, 2.0 stl, 1.7 blk, 4.6 ast, 2.8 TO (31 mpg)

I put these boxscore per 100 numbers up to have something quantitative, but obviously it doesn't tell the whole story. It does give some support to my following statements, though:

1) Kareem was still clearly the best scorer of this group. Slightly more volume on much better efficiency

You can't really compare the per 100 possession stats of scorers in this era vs previous eras.

For example, from 74-80, there were only 6 seasons of 35+ points/100 and 46 seasons of 30+ points/100. From 01-07, there were 40 seasons of 35+ points/100 and 122 seasons of 30+ points/100. Same with assists. 22 seasons of 10+ assists from 74-80 in comparison to 90 from 01-07, 1 season of 13+ assists in 74-80 compared to 20 from 01-07. Easier to accumulate per possession stats in this era than in the high possession era.


http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&per_minute_base=36&type=per_poss&per_poss_base=100&season_start=1&season_end=-1&lg_id=NBA&age_min=0&age_max=99&is_playoffs=N&height_min=0&height_max=99&year_min=2001&year_max=2007&birth_country_is=Y&as_comp=gt&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&force%3Apos_is=1&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=1500&c6mult=1.0&order_by=pts_per_poss

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&per_minute_base=36&type=per_poss&per_poss_base=100&season_start=1&season_end=-1&lg_id=NBA&age_min=0&age_max=99&is_playoffs=N&height_min=0&height_max=99&year_min=1974&year_max=1980&birth_country_is=Y&as_comp=gt&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&force%3Apos_is=1&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=1500&c6mult=1.0&order_by=pts_per_poss
User avatar
PCProductions
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,763
And1: 3,989
Joined: Apr 18, 2012
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#6 » by PCProductions » Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:46 pm

Pretty interested in hearing about ElGee or others candidacy for Hakeem this high up.
colts18
Head Coach
Posts: 7,433
And1: 3,248
Joined: Jun 29, 2009

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#7 » by colts18 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:05 pm

Duncan and KG don't have Kareem's longevity. Looking at years 13-18 ignore the fact that Kareem was significantly better in years 1-12 than KG or Duncan. For example, KG has 2 post-high school years where he didn't contribute much.

Kareem (935 games, 38K minutes) (1st 4 seasons has no BPM so I will use PER for them):
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
4

9 1st place finishes and 12/12 in top 5 finishes. 6 MVP's, 12 Top 5 finishes


Duncan (899 games, 33K minutes):
4
Not in top 10
5
9
1
3
3
5
Not in Top 10
4
10
6

1 1st place finish and 7 top 5 finishes. 2 MVP's, 9 Top 5 finishes


KG (927 games, 36K minutes):
Not in top 10
Not in top 10
10
7
6
5
3
2
1
1
2
Not in Top 10

2 1st place finishes and 6 top 5 finishes. 1 MVP and 4 top 5 finishes.
User avatar
eminence
RealGM
Posts: 16,664
And1: 11,514
Joined: Mar 07, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#8 » by eminence » Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:29 pm

Good 1st thread everyone! My top two ballot choices are still on the board, and Duncan feels pretty locked into #1, but am following the KAJ talk closely to see if he'll retain my #2 (Russell and maybe Wilt/KG would likely be my main challengers, but who knows - Elgee could whip up something interesting for Hakeem too).
I bought a boat.
urnoggin
Freshman
Posts: 96
And1: 33
Joined: Aug 27, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#9 » by urnoggin » Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:44 pm

colts18 wrote:Duncan and KG don't have Kareem's longevity. Looking at years 13-18 ignore the fact that Kareem was significantly better in years 1-12 than KG or Duncan. For example, KG has 2 post-high school years where he didn't contribute much.

Kareem (935 games, 38K minutes) (1st 4 seasons has no BPM so I will use PER for them):
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
4

9 1st place finishes and 12/12 in top 5 finishes. 6 MVP's, 12 Top 5 finishes


Duncan (899 games, 33K minutes):
4
Not in top 10
5
9
1
3
3
5
Not in Top 10
4
10
6

1 1st place finish and 7 top 5 finishes. 2 MVP's, 9 Top 5 finishes


KG (927 games, 36K minutes):
Not in top 10
Not in top 10
10
7
6
5
3
2
1
1
2
Not in Top 10

2 1st place finishes and 6 top 5 finishes. 1 MVP and 4 top 5 finishes.


Look at the respective competition that each had to face. Here is the top 3 in PER(up to '73)/BPM (after '73) in each of their first 12 seasons:

'70- West, Kareem, Oscar
'71- Kareem, West, Bing
'72- Kareem, Lanier, West
'73- Kareem, Archibald, West
'74- Kareem, Lanier, Barry
'75- Kareem, Lanier, Frazier
'76- Kareem, Alvan Adams, Lanier
'77- Kareem, Bobby Jones, Walton
'78- Kareem, Walton, Lanier
'79- Kareem, Unseld, Marques Johnson
'80- Dr. J, Kareem, Magic
'81- Dr. J, Marques Johnson, Alvan Adams
'96- D-Rob, MJ, Mailman
'97- Mailman, Hill, Blaylock, (Barkley), (MJ), (Pippen)
'98- D-Rob, Mailman, Pippen
'99- D-Rob, Mailman, Shaq
'00- Shaq, Mailman, GP
'01- Shaq, VC, Francis, (Mailman), (KG)
'02- Duncan, Shaq, KG
'03- T-Mac, KG, Duncan
'04- KG, AK47, Duncan
'05- KG, LeBron, Manu
'06- LeBron, KG, Wade
'07- Wade, LeBron, Manu
'08- LeBron, CP3, Manu
'09- LeBron, CP3, Wade

Aside from the fact the PER/BPM is a terrible way to compare players (is '76 Alvan Adams the 2nd best player in the NBA?, is '77 Bobby Jones better than '77 Walton?, are Marques Johnson and Alvan Adams better than Kareem in '81?, is '97 Blaylock better than '97 MJ?, is '01 Steve Francis better than '01 KG?, is AK47 the second best player in the league in '04?, etc. etc.), Kareem also faced way worse competition that KG/Duncan. We're talking about 4 years of post-prime West, 2 years of peak Walton, a couple years of post-prime Oscar, a couple years of prime Dr. J, and the first 2 years of Magic and Bird versus multiple years of MJ (arguably post-prime but still best player in the league), Mailman, D-Rob, LeBron, Wade, CP3, Manu, Kobe, Shaq, peak McGrady for one year, and even older Hakeem/Barkley/Pippen. Although I do believe that Kareem had a better first twelve years than KG (and probably Duncan), compaing BPM and PER in this fashion proves nothing.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,454
And1: 8,115
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#10 » by trex_8063 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:44 pm

drza wrote:
Spoiler:
Back to WOWY, at peak

I mentioned the genesis of ElGee's WOWY work from the RPoY project, but of course he went on to develop it in much more detail across NBA history. As such, I can reference that work and find single-year WOWY runs, across multiple seasons during their peak years, for each of Kareem, Walton and Duncan. Let's take a look:

Kareem 1975 (16 games missed): SRS in 2.6, SRS out -4.5
Kareem 1978 (20 games missed): SRS in -3.4, SRS out -1.7

Duncan 2004 (10 games missed): SRS in, 8.5; SRS out, 5.3
Duncan 2005 (12 games missed): SRS in, 9.3; SRS out, -1

Walton 1977 (16 games missed): SRS in, 7.8; SRS out, -2.6
Walton 1978 (10 games missed): SRS in, 9.4; SRS out, +1

ElGee went through and calculated his WOWY score for each run, but I honestly don't have the greatest handle on that process so I'll abstain from quoting the scores themselves (though Walton's and Duncan's were both higher, here).

But, just looking at the raw data for these runs, two seasons each, right around each of their peaks...both Walton and Duncan seemed to be having significantly larger impacts on their team's fortunes at their peaks than Kareem did. At least, by this one measure. But, in many ways it's the best impact data available from the pre databall era, especially since each missed significant time during peak years so that the measure could be made.

Put it together...what does this suggest about Kareem's peak + trends from databall

So, what am I left with, here:

1) Kareem, in his prime, had elite skillsets across the board (thanks, Blackmill vids)

2) Kareem, in his prime, put up scoring (volume and efficiency) numbers at an all-Mt. Rushmore level.

3) Kareem, in his prime, put up excellent rebounding, blocked shot and assist numbers as well

4) However, while Kareem had the ABILITY to be an elite horizontal defender and possibly offensive hub as a passer from the center position, in PRACTICE he tended to be more of a vertical defender around the rim and to pass as more of a secondary role, not as a big man team offense initiator



Couple of comments/observations which give me pause wrt the above data......

1) The "games missed" cited appear incomplete: it has 16 of the 17 games Kareem missed in '75, and all 20 that he missed in '78...... but for Duncan it's showing only 10 of the 13 he missed in '04 and 12 of the 16 he missed in '05. With Walton apparently 16 of 17 games missed in '77 are included in the data-set, but only 10 of 24 missed games in '78.
I don't know, but it's possible that the games NOT included in the Duncan/Walton samples may be skewing things in their favour.

2) In the '78 sample for Kareem, I'd note that Kermit Washington was around for I think all of the games in which Kareem was absent, but then missed almost the entirety of the 62 games Kareem played that year; ditto Earl Tatum and rookie James Edwards. Jamaal Wilkes too was around when Kareem was absent, but missed a huge chunk of the games in which Kareem was present.
As far as the flip-side, it was late-career Charlie Scott and 2nd-year Adrian Dantley who were absent at the same time Kareem was absent, but largely around when he was around.
Still, I'm just pointing out that there was A LOT of other roster changes/absences around when he was present, and probably the slight majority of them would tend to skew things NOT in Kareem's favour (particularly that near-total absence of Kermit Washington and James Edwards in the games Kareem played in: basically left them without a respectable back-up center).

3) I wouldn't equate "Impact" exactly to "Player Quality". I'm not sure of if you are, or how you would factor other components of impact into your views, but just putting that out there.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
User avatar
Joao Saraiva
RealGM
Posts: 13,329
And1: 6,138
Joined: Feb 09, 2011
   

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#11 » by Joao Saraiva » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:19 pm

1st vote - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

According to the formula I use KAJ is #1. (not in that thread since I haven't put it all there, because I'm updating as much as I can on my free time for the top 100 players project) viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1457603#start_here

Now, I understand the formula has some problems when ranking players below 1980 especially, but it goes a bit both ways: more RPG, higher pace, but I don't adjust ts% and it's not the most efficient era of the NBA.

KAJ has a tremendously extended prime, from 1970 to 1986.

That's 17 seasons of great produtction. If you think about it, MJ has 11 full seasons of those. (one injured in Chicago and in 95 he didn't play the entire season)

KAJ is the leading scorer in the history of the NBA and many people know him as a scorer, but he's way more than that.

Excellent passer when doubled in the post, very good passer in transition (he didn't have to look for a short pass for the PG, he could initiate transition with his own passes, and long ones - if you think about it that's really useful for a guy that got so many defensive rebounds over his career and played on teams that liked to run like showtime lakers).

Very good help defender and shot blocker.

He covers more ground than the traditional C. I'm not talking about KG levels here, but he sure was good at it. In the last thread we saw a lot of votes that way.

Basically he had very good impact on both ends of the court during a long long time.

I see his peak and prime a little lower than MJ's and LeBron's, but not by large margins. And so far LeBron has had great seasons since 2006 (12 great seasons) but I still need a bit more from him to overtake KAJ (at least 14/15 seasons of LBJ's prime).

KAJ also proved himself as both a floor raiser and as a guy who could play his role on high ceiling teams (both as the man and later as a 2nd best).

He won 6 MVPs (most in NBA history), he won 6 rings, 2 finals MVPs, and I think he was clearly the man in 3 of his rings, co-best player in another and a very important complementary piece in his last two.



What separates KAJ from Bill Russell? (since I think he will be the other main candidate along LeBron and I've already discussed LBJ)
- Floor raising. I don't believe you can put a bad cast with Russell and have nearly the same success as you can have with KAJ. Of course I'm not talking about championships with garbage casts, but I think the average cast KAJ needs to contend is much lower than the one from Russell; (I see a good case for LeBron here)

- Offensive impact. Sure Russell has the edge on D, but I don't feel it's gigantic. Clear one. On the other end of the floor, I think Russell doesn't even belong in the same page as KAJ. I can understand the defensive argument for Russell against players who don't come near him in defensive impact like Magic or Bird, but not against KAJ; (I see a good case for LeBron here)

- Longevity. I can even see someone discussing peak and prime for Russell (I don't see it, I think KAJ is definitely above - and prime is if you define it as 5 years or something). However, longevity goes a long way for KAJ. He has more prime seasons than the entire Russell career. (I still think it's too much for LBJ to overtake).

2nd vote - LeBron James
“These guys have been criticized the last few years for not getting to where we’re going, but I’ve always said that the most important thing in sports is to keep trying. Let this be an example of what it means to say it’s never over.” - Jerry Sloan
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 22,395
And1: 18,823
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#12 » by HeartBreakKid » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:22 pm

Shouldn't the player who is #1 on the rankings be posted in the OP?
User avatar
Winsome Gerbil
RealGM
Posts: 15,021
And1: 13,091
Joined: Feb 07, 2010

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#13 » by Winsome Gerbil » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:24 pm

At this point my legitimate candidates for this spot are basically Lebron, Kareem, Wilt, and while it may be a few spots too early, Spencer Hawes who always gets points in my book for the GOAT suit:
Image
User avatar
Joao Saraiva
RealGM
Posts: 13,329
And1: 6,138
Joined: Feb 09, 2011
   

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#14 » by Joao Saraiva » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:32 pm

Winsome Gerbil wrote:At this point my legitimate candidates for this spot are basically Lebron, Kareem, Wilt, and while it may be a few spots too early, Spencer Hawes who always gets points in my book for the GOAT suit:
Image


Actually agree with the 3 that you have, but not on the suit. I'm pretty sure Westbrook has better longevity suiting up with garbage.

I have #1 KAJ, #2 MJ (already voted), #3 LBJ and #4 Wilt.
“These guys have been criticized the last few years for not getting to where we’re going, but I’ve always said that the most important thing in sports is to keep trying. Let this be an example of what it means to say it’s never over.” - Jerry Sloan
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 29,891
And1: 9,620
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#15 » by penbeast0 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:32 pm

Going to try to get something up quickly then can counterpunch . . .

VOTE: Bill Russell

Impact, even if focused almost exclusively on defensive end, was still clearly the highest in NBA history (not sure about Mikan but see point about era strength). In terms of playoff success, he had shorter roads but look at his playoff win%, it's ridiculously good over 90%. No one else in the discussion is even close. And, he never missed the playoffs like Kareem, Wilt, etc. And it wasn't the talent around him, it was Russell. His early teams had a lot of big names but seriously questionable performance (they were full of offensive talent yet consistently finished at the bottom of the league offensively and at the top defensively). His later teams had better talent at both ends but still inefficient offensively, winning with defense. That's on Russell.

Era strength, the 60s were a strong era because they concentrated the talent on a very few teams without the color barrier for top players (teams were under some peer pressure to have the bottom of the bench white just to avoid it being an all-black sport). Today's era is stronger, I believe, because the worldwide popularity of the NBA has led to players from all continents growing up with basketball and a strong influx of global talent. This was not true for 20th century eras. So, I would rank the decades:
1. Modern
2. 2000s
3. 60s (concentration of talent)
4. 90s
5. 80s (serious expansion weakening)
6. 70s (extreme expansion issues)
7. 50s (segregation)


For second place, I vote Wilt Chamberlain (but might be convinced to switch to LeBron; I will keep an open mind). In terms of why I vote Wilt over Kareem:

1. If you are looking for statistical dominance, no one ever dominated the stats like Wilt. Compare him to the league in his high scoring days and he scored more, led or was second in fg% (before the 3), led or was second in rebounding every year, and even led the league in total assists one year. Add his ironman status and that he never fouled out of a game and the ridiculous minutes he played, and there's no one, not even Jordan close. Both were also great shotblockers, Kareem probably played smarter, Wilt was more athletic, but Wilt was a level above even prime Kareem as a rebounder.
2. In terms of giving you a chance to win a ring. Wilt only won two rings, only one as clear best player, but that's because he faced Bill Russell (my vote for GOAT). In the years of his career facing many playoff opponents, his playoff series winning percentage was over 80%, slightly better than Michael Jordan's career. Kareem in his first decade also won only one series as clear best player, but other than the Milwaukee championships, his teams consistently seemed to underperform expectations (and looking back, underperform their talent). Why?
I would argue that Kareem's teams, except for Oscar's one big year of leadership, didn't play like teams. Without Oscar to lead them, they were similar to Wilt's early Warriors teams, without a great deal more success. A lot of this is on Kareem. He had excuses . . . he was a convert to Islam playing in a midwestern Christian city with mainly Christian teammates, there was the terrible tragedy of the Muslims murdered in his house, racism certainly played a part (though Wilt's 60s were also racist). But his teams didn't play like teams except when led by Oscar or later Magic. It was only when Magic Johnson arrived and Kareem was able NOT to take a leadership role that the Lakers became the dynasty of the 80s.
So, while Kareem's longevity blows everyone else away (at least until the current generation of straight out of HS players who get an extra 4 years to start with), his prime was clearly below Wilt's. I value Wilt's prime more than Kareem's prime plus the extra seasons where he was still an All-Star. The value of being the clear cut most talented player in the world (as both were in their prime!) dwarfs the impact of being a former ATG level All-Star player by enough for Wilt to take this.
3. You can also see Wilt sacrificing his scoring to help his team win in the Alex Hannum days (and maybe too much in the Bill Sharman days); when Kareem had to sacrifice, he sacrificed the dirty work part of his game in terms of rebounding and defense. There's a lot of (justified at times) criticism of Wilt as obsessed with his own performance, not his team's performance, but I think that goes at least as strongly to Kareem. I do have Kareem next after Wilt on my list (again, without having made a strong analysis of his career v. LeBron's which I am looking forward to).

Vote for Next on the list: Bill Russell
Runnerup: Wilt Chamberlain
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
User avatar
Joao Saraiva
RealGM
Posts: 13,329
And1: 6,138
Joined: Feb 09, 2011
   

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#16 » by Joao Saraiva » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:37 pm

HeartBreakKid wrote:Shouldn't the player who is #1 on the rankings be posted in the OP?


Posting the list on the OP every time would be fine.
“These guys have been criticized the last few years for not getting to where we’re going, but I’ve always said that the most important thing in sports is to keep trying. Let this be an example of what it means to say it’s never over.” - Jerry Sloan
User avatar
Joao Saraiva
RealGM
Posts: 13,329
And1: 6,138
Joined: Feb 09, 2011
   

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#17 » by Joao Saraiva » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:41 pm

penbeast0 wrote:Going to try to get something up quickly then can counterpunch . . .

VOTE: Bill Russell

Impact, even if focused almost exclusively on defensive end, was still clearly the highest in NBA history (not sure about Mikan but see point about era strength). In terms of playoff success, he had shorter roads but look at his playoff win%, it's ridiculously good over 90%. No one else in the discussion is even close. And, he never missed the playoffs like Kareem, Wilt, etc. And it wasn't the talent around him, it was Russell. His early teams had a lot of big names but seriously questionable performance (they were full of offensive talent yet consistently finished at the bottom of the league offensively and at the top defensively). His later teams had better talent at both ends but still inefficient offensively, winning with defense. That's on Russell.

Era strength, the 60s were a strong era because they concentrated the talent on a very few teams without the color barrier for top players (teams were under some peer pressure to have the bottom of the bench white just to avoid it being an all-black sport). Today's era is stronger, I believe, because the worldwide popularity of the NBA has led to players from all continents growing up with basketball and a strong influx of global talent. This was not true for 20th century eras. So, I would rank the decades:
1. Modern
2. 2000s
3. 60s (concentration of talent)
4. 90s
5. 80s (serious expansion weakening)
6. 70s (extreme expansion issues)
7. 50s (segregation)


For second place, I vote Wilt Chamberlain (but might be convinced to switch to LeBron; I will keep an open mind). In terms of why I vote Wilt over Kareem:

1. If you are looking for statistical dominance, no one ever dominated the stats like Wilt. Compare him to the league in his high scoring days and he scored more, led or was second in fg% (before the 3), led or was second in rebounding every year, and even led the league in total assists one year. Add his ironman status and that he never fouled out of a game and the ridiculous minutes he played, and there's no one, not even Jordan close. Both were also great shotblockers, Kareem probably played smarter, Wilt was more athletic, but Wilt was a level above even prime Kareem as a rebounder.
2. In terms of giving you a chance to win a ring. Wilt only won two rings, only one as clear best player, but that's because he faced Bill Russell (my vote for GOAT). In the years of his career facing many playoff opponents, his playoff series winning percentage was over 80%, slightly better than Michael Jordan's career. Kareem in his first decade also won only one series as clear best player, but other than the Milwaukee championships, his teams consistently seemed to underperform expectations (and looking back, underperform their talent). Why?
I would argue that Kareem's teams, except for Oscar's one big year of leadership, didn't play like teams. Without Oscar to lead them, they were similar to Wilt's early Warriors teams, without a great deal more success. A lot of this is on Kareem. He had excuses . . . he was a convert to Islam playing in a midwestern Christian city with mainly Christian teammates, there was the terrible tragedy of the Muslims murdered in his house, racism certainly played a part (though Wilt's 60s were also racist). But his teams didn't play like teams except when led by Oscar or later Magic. It was only when Magic Johnson arrived and Kareem was able NOT to take a leadership role that the Lakers became the dynasty of the 80s.
So, while Kareem's longevity blows everyone else away (at least until the current generation of straight out of HS players who get an extra 4 years to start with), his prime was clearly below Wilt's. I value Wilt's prime more than Kareem's prime plus the extra seasons where he was still an All-Star. The value of being the clear cut most talented player in the world (as both were in their prime!) dwarfs the impact of being a former ATG level All-Star player by enough for Wilt to take this.
3. You can also see Wilt sacrificing his scoring to help his team win in the Alex Hannum days (and maybe too much in the Bill Sharman days); when Kareem had to sacrifice, he sacrificed the dirty work part of his game in terms of rebounding and defense. There's a lot of (justified at times) criticism of Wilt as obsessed with his own performance, not his team's performance, but I think that goes at least as strongly to Kareem. I do have Kareem next after Wilt on my list (again, without having made a strong analysis of his career v. LeBron's which I am looking forward to).

Vote for Next on the list: Bill Russell
Runnerup: Wilt Chamberlain


About what KAJ sacrificed - given the results, maybe it was the right thing to sacrifice.

I think the Lakers had a great team rebounding wise (big big team) and on D I actually think KAJ usually did his job pretty well in the playoffs.

His scoring was still efficient, and he did take a bit less load in that regard but it was still very good. He was also still a good passer from the post... so would it make sense for him to sacrifice his role on offense that much? I don't think so.
“These guys have been criticized the last few years for not getting to where we’re going, but I’ve always said that the most important thing in sports is to keep trying. Let this be an example of what it means to say it’s never over.” - Jerry Sloan
JordansBulls
RealGM
Posts: 60,466
And1: 5,344
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: HCA (Homecourt Advantage)

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#18 » by JordansBulls » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:48 pm

Joao Saraiva wrote:1st vote - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

According to the formula I use KAJ is #1. (not in that thread since I haven't put it all there, because I'm updating as much as I can on my free time for the top 100 players project) viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1457603#start_here

Now, I understand the formula has some problems when ranking players below 1980 especially, but it goes a bit both ways: more RPG, higher pace, but I don't adjust ts% and it's not the most efficient era of the NBA.

KAJ has a tremendously extended prime, from 1970 to 1986.

That's 17 seasons of great produtction. If you think about it, MJ has 11 full seasons of those. (one injured in Chicago and in 95 he didn't play the entire season)

KAJ is the leading scorer in the history of the NBA and many people know him as a scorer, but he's way more than that.

Excellent passer when doubled in the post, very good passer in transition (he didn't have to look for a short pass for the PG, he could initiate transition with his own passes, and long ones - if you think about it that's really useful for a guy that got so many defensive rebounds over his career and played on teams that liked to run like showtime lakers).

Very good help defender and shot blocker.

He covers more ground than the traditional C. I'm not talking about KG levels here, but he sure was good at it. In the last thread we saw a lot of votes that way.

Basically he had very good impact on both ends of the court during a long long time.

I see his peak and prime a little lower than MJ's and LeBron's, but not by large margins. And so far LeBron has had great seasons since 2006 (12 great seasons) but I still need a bit more from him to overtake KAJ (at least 14/15 seasons of LBJ's prime).

KAJ also proved himself as both a floor raiser and as a guy who could play his role on high ceiling teams (both as the man and later as a 2nd best).

He won 6 MVPs (most in NBA history), he won 6 rings, 2 finals MVPs, and I think he was clearly the man in 3 of his rings, co-best player in another and a very important complementary piece in his last two.



What separates KAJ from Bill Russell? (since I think he will be the other main candidate along LeBron and I've already discussed LBJ)
- Floor raising. I don't believe you can put a bad cast with Russell and have nearly the same success as you can have with KAJ. Of course I'm not talking about championships with garbage casts, but I think the average cast KAJ needs to contend is much lower than the one from Russell; (I see a good case for LeBron here)

- Offensive impact. Sure Russell has the edge on D, but I don't feel it's gigantic. Clear one. On the other end of the floor, I think Russell doesn't even belong in the same page as KAJ. I can understand the defensive argument for Russell against players who don't come near him in defensive impact like Magic or Bird, but not against KAJ; (I see a good case for LeBron here)

- Longevity. I can even see someone discussing peak and prime for Russell (I don't see it, I think KAJ is definitely above - and prime is if you define it as 5 years or something). However, longevity goes a long way for KAJ. He has more prime seasons than the entire Russell career. (I still think it's too much for LBJ to overtake).

2nd vote - LeBron James


I don't think it is about seasons it is what you do in those seasons especially when you have legit championship squads. For most of his prime the teams underachieved from 1975-1979 (Except maybe 1977) missing the playoffs twice in his prime in a divided league when you had a one man show who led a team to the title one of those years and very poor to average teams won it all in 1978 and 1979. Playing longer doesn't do it for me unless the player is collecting MVP's, Titles, etc as the best player on the squad especially when the player that played less won as much or more as the clear cut and has as many accolades as well if not more.

Spoiler:
I look at it like Jim Brown in football. He played 9 years, but just because Emmitt Smith played longer doesn't make him better or that he has done more.
Image
"Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships."
- Michael Jordan
scrabbarista
RealGM
Posts: 19,871
And1: 17,440
Joined: May 31, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#19 » by scrabbarista » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:50 pm

2. Bill Russell
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Will comment tonight.
All human life on the earth is like grass, and all human glory is like a flower in a field. The grass dries up and its flower falls off, but the Lord’s word endures forever.
JordansBulls
RealGM
Posts: 60,466
And1: 5,344
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: HCA (Homecourt Advantage)

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 List #2 

Post#20 » by JordansBulls » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:51 pm

I think you need to put down 1st vote and 2nd vote in each thread to make it easier to follow.
Image
"Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships."
- Michael Jordan

Return to Player Comparisons